Ralph Conway wrote:
In direction of the "baby 1D X" mentioned by northlight images. Yes. Nice. But I guess its price would be somewhere inbetween 5D III and 1D X ... :-(
I'd pay upto $4.5K as it would be a better camera than the 1D IV in all but build and with the 1D X AF I'd be very happy. 5D III is superb camera but for birding use it's a bit pixel challenged with 500mm as my longest glass.
Most people on the forum have little idea of the magnitude of technology that goes into a DSLR. We have been told by some that Canon could whomp up a high MPx camera in a couple of months after the 36 MPx Nikon was announced.
It seems Google translate SKR to USD in a 1:1 fashion... and it's more like 1:8 hence the discrepance... 1 vs 8 bilion
Still $1b is a lot of money just for producing sensors for your own brand
surf monkey wrote:
I wonder what is the original source for this info?
If it's true, then at least they're trying to build new sensors.
Reading further postings the writer says that building shuch a line is extremely difficult without telling others (i.e. industry watchers) and it takes years to get it going. Apparently the writer has been watching market and claims no such investment has been done by Canon that would give them the capability to produce large quantities of high densisty ff sensors (they do have the knowledge though).
What is is worrying is that the cost to produce such a device will become extremely hgih if only used by Canon.
The presumption that Canon did not already put sensors with more than 22MP into their current cameras because they are unable to produce sensors with more than 22MP is naive.
gdanmitchell wrote:
The presumption that Canon did not already put sensors with more than 22MP into their current cameras because they are unable to produce sensors with more than 22MP is naive.
Dan
Of course Canon could have more than 22MP. But not any sensor like some people here suggested. That would double the MP every second year since the first one. Then it would be a 100+MP sensor
not that this is all too meaningful... but talked to a canon dealer about any new full frame offerings coming out and he didn't feel we'd see this before next spring at earliest. Thought there'd be a leak now if there were to be one before photokina.
Sven Jeppesen wrote:
Of course Canon could have more than 22MP. But not any sensor like some people here suggested. That would double the MP every second year since the first one. Then it would be a 100+MP sensor
We will see a 46 MP FF camera sensor very soon. Agree +100 with Dan.
gdanmitchell wrote:
The presumption that Canon did not already put sensors with more than 22MP into their current cameras because they are unable to produce sensors with more than 22MP is naive.
Dan
Call me naive But my gut feeling is that the current production line for ff sensors are not designed for sensors with >25-30 Mpixels. After 3 years with the superb 5D Mk2 the Mk3-sensor is not really "ground breaking"... given all this years of research.
We have been hearing over and over again that the Sony sensor division is so much larger than Canon and it makes easier to get revenue back from investments in new lines. Still I would love to see Canon produce a sensor that equals or betters the Sony Exmores! Still I fear it will be quite some time before this happens...
Will be fun to see what happens at Photokina. I do hope I have misunderstood it all and that Canon delivers an über-performing 40 Mpixel camera
WebDog wrote:
After 3 years with the superb 5D Mk2 the Mk3-sensor is not really "ground breaking"... given all this years of research.
Pure marketing reason and misinterpretation of the competitor's status. Canon did not expect anything like the D800 at all considering its better resolution sensor. In the 5D MkII the AF was purposely crippled to avoid internal competition with the 1D series models at the time, Canon tried a similar thing with the 5D III - giving the consumer the desired AF capabilities, but this time leaving the sensor unchanged. The plan would have worked without the D800 surprise.....but this all was discussed in many other posts earlier. I am quite certain that Canon already has the capability to build a high MP FF sensor into the cameras.
Man, would you quit being a Canon apologist ?. I meant..I like Canon but look .. can you guarantee whatever this great sensor you'd said coming without shadow bandings ?. MP doesn't mean jack.
retrofocus wrote:
Pure marketing reason and misinterpretation of the competitor's status. Canon did not expect anything like the D800 at all considering its better resolution sensor. In the 5D MkII the AF was purposely crippled to avoid internal competition with the 1D series models at the time, Canon tried a similar thing with the 5D III - giving the consumer the desired AF capabilities, but this time leaving the sensor unchanged. The plan would have worked without the D800 surprise.....but this all was discussed in many other posts earlier. I am quite certain that Canon already has the capability to build a high MP FF sensor into the cameras. ...Show more →
retrofocus wrote:
Pure marketing reason and misinterpretation of the competitor's status. Canon did not expect anything like the D800 at all considering its better resolution sensor.
The Sony 36MP sensor in the D800 was leaked a year before the D800 was announced. And since that sensor is mostly an upsized version of the D7000 sensor the technology path was pretty clear to most gearheads and certainly must have been clear to Canon.
gdanmitchell wrote:
The presumption that Canon did not already put sensors with more than 22MP into their current cameras because they are unable to produce sensors with more than 22MP is naive.
WebDog wrote:
Call me naive But my gut feeling is that the current production line for ff sensors are not designed for sensors with >25-30 Mpixels. After 3 years with the superb 5D Mk2 the Mk3-sensor is not really "ground breaking"... given all this years of research.
True, the 5D3 sensor improved quite a bit in very high iso performance but more so in long exposures and I believe the sensor cleaning is MUCH more effective. On top of that the 5D3 is a much faster camera. But yea, the sensor is NOT groundbreaking in the least. Just more refined.
The problem with a 1DXS is the price. Given the 1DX is 6500 bucks, a 1DXS with double de MP (36+) would be in the $8,000 range. The D800 argument surfaces again...
gdanmitchell wrote:
The presumption that Canon did not already put sensors with more than 22MP into their current cameras because they are unable to produce sensors with more than 22MP is naive.
snapsy wrote:
Why is it naive?
Because Canon has long ago demonstrated 50 Mpx full frame sensors and 120 Mpx APS-H (1.3x) sensors. So it is just a matter of timing to get the right combination of sensor quality, given the technology push coming from Sonikon / Nikony, and the right combination of price points and production costs and economies of scale.
Now, its been almost 5 years to the day since the 1DS3 was introduced. Hummm, photokina coming up. Canon still insists that the 1DX replaces both the 1DS and 1D but I dont think anyone is buying that statement. Its completely Bogus. The 1DX is a high speed sports/pj camera.
retrofocus wrote:
The plan would have worked without the D800 surprise....
"would have worked"? It has worked and worked very well. 5D Mark III is selling very well. Nikon is or was having trouble getting even basic levels of production up while 5D3s have been steadily chugging through retailers and into customers' hands.
Sneakyracer wrote:
Now, its been almost 5 years to the day since the 1DS3 was introduced. Hummm, photokina coming up. Canon still insists that the 1DX replaces both the 1DS and 1D but I dont think anyone is buying that statement. Its completely Bogus. The 1DX is a high speed sports/pj camera.
But my gut feeling is that the current production line for ff sensors are not designed for sensors with >25-30 Mpixels. After 3 years with the superb 5D Mk2 the Mk3-sensor is not really "ground breaking"... given all this years of research.